141 réponses à ce sujet

[Kaaaash]

 This is what worries me (Im a noob.. so bare with me.. first post, but.. this really bothered me)

--
360: If the multiplayer is tied into the singleplayer, will that limit players returning to it after finishing the story?CH: No, it’s not tied to single-player in that way.  It takes place in the war timeframe of Mass Effect 3, but there is no story interaction except for one: the more you succeed in multiplayer, the more successful the overall war effort will be for you as a player in the Mass Effect universe.  This means that if you then attempt the ending of the single-player experience, you’ll experience a greater level of success in the ending than you would if you had never played multiplayer.
--

So does this mean I have to play multiplayer to get the 'Win"/100% ending.. if there is such a thing?  This seems a bit, rough to people who just dont like pick random people up on line and dealing with the pain of well them being random.   So my choice is to not win because I dislike MP?  I really hope the answer is no.

[Stalker]

I would completely agree with additional missions and survival-modes that lets you experience these fights that Casey mentioned, but I am still anxious about how it will determine the outcome of the singleplayer.

I have trust in what Bioware does, but I still don't understand how they will implement it. They just tell that you can get the "perfect ending" without multiplayer and the next sentence is "it will determine the outcome"... I want clarification!

[Phaedon]

AyraWinla wrote...

The WW2 bits actually interest me a lot! I've read a ton of books upon the various aspects and areas of the war, and if they are actually going to use the concept of mobile warfare for the Reaper wars, then it can become something amazing.

Sorry for going off-topic, but if you have a Twitter account, take a look at @RealTimeWWII.

Very fascinating stuff. The Finnish Winter War has "just" began.

Modifié par Phaedon, 02 décembre 2011 - 09:27 .

[Someone With Mass]

Kaaaash wrote...

So does this mean I have to play multiplayer to get the 'Win"/100% ending.. if there is such a thing?  This seems a bit, rough to people who just dont like pick random people up on line and dealing with the pain of well them being random.   So my choice is to not win because I dislike MP?  I really hope the answer is no.

No. It just mean that you'll earn something to use in the singleplayer while playing multiplayer.

Not to mention that War Assests alone won't win the war.

[SNascimento]

Kaaaash wrote...

 This is what worries me (Im a noob.. so bare with me.. first post, but.. this really bothered me)

--
360: If the multiplayer is tied into the singleplayer, will that limit players returning to it after finishing the story?CH: No, it’s not tied to single-player in that way.  It takes place in the war timeframe of Mass Effect 3, but there is no story interaction except for one: the more you succeed in multiplayer, the more successful the overall war effort will be for you as a player in the Mass Effect universe.  This means that if you then attempt the ending of the single-player experience, you’ll experience a greater level of success in the ending than you would if you had never played multiplayer.
--

So does this mean I have to play multiplayer to get the 'Win"/100% ending.. if there is such a thing?  This seems a bit, rough to people who just dont like pick random people up on line and dealing with the pain of well them being random.   So my choice is to not win because I dislike MP?  I really hope the answer is no.

.
Why don't you just, you know, read the rest of the interview? Looks what the paragraph right below that one says:
.
But it is ultimately about choice.  By doing other things, such as doing a very complete single-player play-through, you can achieve the greatest levels of success in the Mass Effect 3 storyline even without playing multiplayer. This is all part of Mass Effect 3’s Galaxy at War system, where you can fight the galactic war not just through singleplayer, but multiplayer as well, in addition to games on social networks, mobile, and iOS.
.
... sigh ... 

[Kaaaash]

SNascimento wrote...

Kaaaash wrote...

 This is what worries me (Im a noob.. so bare with me.. first post, but.. this really bothered me)

--
360: If the multiplayer is tied into the singleplayer, will that limit players returning to it after finishing the story?CH: No, it’s not tied to single-player in that way.  It takes place in the war timeframe of Mass Effect 3, but there is no story interaction except for one: the more you succeed in multiplayer, the more successful the overall war effort will be for you as a player in the Mass Effect universe.  This means that if you then attempt the ending of the single-player experience, you’ll experience a greater level of success in the ending than you would if you had never played multiplayer.
--

So does this mean I have to play multiplayer to get the 'Win"/100% ending.. if there is such a thing?  This seems a bit, rough to people who just dont like pick random people up on line and dealing with the pain of well them being random.   So my choice is to not win because I dislike MP?  I really hope the answer is no.

.
Why don't you just, you know, read the rest of the interview? Looks what the paragraph right below that one says:
.
But it is ultimately about choice.  By doing other things, such as doing a very complete single-player play-through, you can achieve the greatest levels of success in the Mass Effect 3 storyline even without playing multiplayer. This is all part of Mass Effect 3’s Galaxy at War system, where you can fight the galactic war not just through singleplayer, but multiplayer as well, in addition to games on social networks, mobile, and iOS.
.
... sigh ... 

They contradict? -sigh- And thats why I hesitated to ask. Back to hiding. 

Modifié par Kaaaash, 02 décembre 2011 - 10:11 .

[The Interloper]

aaand we learned almost nothing here. Yay!

[Ticktank]

If the guy who keeps me EAmployed and pEAid tells me multiplayer is awesome, of course I'll say its awesome.

Modifié par Ticktank, 03 décembre 2011 - 12:26 .

[ChurchOfZod]

Kamay wrote...

 Bioware isn't stupid and won't alienate the fanbase that made them who they are (even with EA putting their fingers in everything

HA! Exhibit A - DRAGON AGE 2

[CroGamer002]

ChurchOfZod wrote...

Kamay wrote...

 Bioware isn't stupid and won't alienate the fanbase that made them who they are (even with EA putting their fingers in everything

HA! Exhibit A - DRAGON AGE 2

No it didn't.

[MegaBadExample]

Went in one ear, and out the other tbh

[Chuvvy]

Casey also defended planet scanning and said allot of people liked it.

[Chuvvy]

Mesina2 wrote...

ChurchOfZod wrote...

Kamay wrote...

 Bioware isn't stupid and won't alienate the fanbase that made them who they are (even with EA putting their fingers in everything

HA! Exhibit A - DRAGON AGE 2

No it didn't.

Opinions.

[CroGamer002]

Slidell505 wrote...

Casey also defended planet scanning and said allot of people liked it.

He is right.


A lot of people liked it, for some reason.



Though majority didn't liked it.

[Alex_SM]

Don't know anyone who enjoyed planet scanning. There are people who didn't care (most playing with mouse, which makes it really faster) and people who hated it.

[alex90c]

Mesina2 wrote...

ChurchOfZod wrote...

Kamay wrote...

 Bioware isn't stupid and won't alienate the fanbase that made them who they are (even with EA putting their fingers in everything

HA! Exhibit A - DRAGON AGE 2

No it didn't.

What, a whole load of people across the internet giving the game a bollocking doesn't count as "alienating"?

Even Bioware themselves admit it alienated people.

Modifié par alex90c, 03 décembre 2011 - 01:35 .

[wolfennights]

Baldur's Gate had multiplayer.

Yes, Bioware's first RPG. The one with all those fancy RPG elements that everyone is worried won't be in ME3.

[Iakus]

wolfennights wrote...

Baldur's Gate had multiplayer.

Yes, Bioware's first RPG. The one with all those fancy RPG elements that everyone is worried won't be in ME3.

The one that was fully moddable so people could create their own single or mutiplayer adventures you mean?

Yeah, if ME3 has that, I'll drop all complaints about MP;)

[Lunatic LK47]

Kamay wrote...

When I first read that ME3 was going to have multiplayer I think I raged harder than I ever had in my long gaming life. I know it wasn't "my game" but I had invested so much time and emotion into the story, characters and universe I didn't want to see it cheapened by a terribad, pointless MP.

This is pretty much my entire pet peeve since the announcement, and I STILL stand by it. How many people are going to be playing ME3's multiplayer on May 2012? Chances are only a dozen people or less. I know for damn sure I'd be burned out with MP by game #10 regardless of whether or not my buddies have the game.

At least Casey semi-understands the picture:

I think people have been burned in a few different ways by games in the
past.  Sometimes a game will add a player-versus-player deathmatch
thing that doesn’t make any sense in the game’s fiction.  Other times a
developer might take a good single-player experience and shoehorn a
co-op feature into it which compromises the quality of the single-player
story.

Modifié par Lunatic LK47, 06 décembre 2011 - 11:35 .

[Ghost-621]

Lunatic LK47 wrote...

Kamay wrote...

When I first read that ME3 was going to have multiplayer I think I raged harder than I ever had in my long gaming life. I know it wasn't "my game" but I had invested so much time and emotion into the story, characters and universe I didn't want to see it cheapened by a terribad, pointless MP.

This is pretty much my entire pet peeve since the announcement, and I STILL stand by it. How many people are going to be playing ME3's multiplayer on May 2012? Chances are only a dozen people or less. I know for damn sure I'd be burned out with MP by game #10 regardless of whether or not my buddies have the game.

At least Casey semi-understands the picture:

I think people have been burned in a few different ways by games in the
past.  Sometimes a game will add a player-versus-player deathmatch
thing that doesn’t make any sense in the game’s fiction.  Other times a
developer might take a good single-player experience and shoehorn a
co-op feature into it which compromises the quality of the single-player
story.

If Casey Hudson understood the picture in the slightest, he would know why the story-lovers like myself hate the idea of a tacked-on horde mode.

[Laser Beam]

Lunatic LK47 wrote...


This is pretty much my entire pet peeve since the announcement, and I STILL stand by it. How many people are going to be playing ME3's multiplayer on May 2012? Chances are only a dozen people or less. I know for damn sure I'd be burned out with MP by game #10 regardless of whether or not my buddies have the game.

I never thought about that. It would be a complete waste or resources/time if the multiplayer didn't last. And considering ME doesn't really attract big market MP players I can see it going that route.

Modifié par Laser Beam, 06 décembre 2011 - 11:54 .

[Laser Beam]

Wow. Double post from nowhere.

Modifié par Laser Beam, 06 décembre 2011 - 11:53 .

[DiebytheSword]

Laser Beam wrote...

Lunatic LK47 wrote...


This is pretty much my entire pet peeve since the announcement, and I STILL stand by it. How many people are going to be playing ME3's multiplayer on May 2012? Chances are only a dozen people or less. I know for damn sure I'd be burned out with MP by game #10 regardless of whether or not my buddies have the game.

I never thought about that. It would be a complete waste or resources/time if the multiplayer didn't last. And considering ME doesn't really attract big market MP players I can see it going that route.

The difference here is that with BSN integration on the coop experience you could literally come here and recruit someone to play a few Co-op rounds with you.  I can see the random hookups getting light, but that doens't mean you can't set up games with other BSN players.